As far as the man as opposed to the book I couldn't say, but his Oak Tree Fine Press is something to be applauded.
I want to hear a few more detailed women's views on how he handles the female characters. Like Saramago, he appears to specialise in rape fantasies.
Also loathed Disgrace. Most of his work seems to be the thin squeezings of tiny sour grapes. He cannot adjust to the new South Africa, not did he want the old. Somewhere in moral limbo. But his universalised "Waiting for the babarians" is surely a classic of world literature and leaves a permament and positive mark on the mind. For the rest, mostly unpleasant stains.
Why do some people love the book, others hate it? It's interesting when a book is so divisive.
I found that the writing was like that by a cold and clinical fish
Morten, could you please say more about what it is that makes Coetzee such a great author for you in "Disgrace'. Hitherto, I have seen quite a few people turn against this author and, more especially, that book.
Beth offers us quite a complex analysis about what she does and doesn't like, and her seeming ambiguity to it: use of language, control-freakery, etc., but still concludes that the novel is brilliant. The coldness that put me off, evidently interested Beth, as she suggests it was intended on the part of the author.
Could you, Morten, tell us a bit more too? I've only read ten pages, and I was put off. But as I have said before, it was an Afrikaner academic who recommended this book (written, of course, in English) to me. And she raved about it.
Why do some people love the book, others hate it? It's interesting when a book is so divisive.
Welcome to the forum, Igu. By Jove, I think you've described perfectly the dichotomy I found related to Disgrace and its tone, or mood, or flavor. I don't know enough about Coetzee or about South Africa to interpret the politics of the novel. So, I'm simplistically attributing the novel's style to authorial intent, a slippery slope if there ever was one. I agree with Morten that the pace and utter bleak beauty of the prose is unforgettable. Next reading will be for understanding.Basically, he repels by coldness and attracts by clinicality.
I never implied that they were similar writers. I just said that the thing that was most lovable about them was the sameit just seems to me that they are two immensely different writers overall.
I hated the passivity of the women in Disgrace, and their characterizations made me deeply uncomfortable, with a couple of exceptions, the first one being the prostitute who ends her relationship with David. She is a woman in control, in contrast to the others. The student, David's daughter, even the woman who runs the clinic are each stymied and misguided in their attempts to express power and control. The student can't directly oppose David and can't match him verbally. She allows herself to be effectively raped by him, then makes a complaint. David's daughter attempts to maintain control over her environment by remaining in a dangerous situation, spitting in the eye of her fate and flying in its face with her pregnancy. This is the second instance of a woman taking an active role and calling her own shots.
I thought the novel was brilliant. It's written so coldly, so brutally, and so well portrays this period in the lives of these people. As for hope, I pulled it from the defiance displayed by David's daughter in choosing to bear a child in light of all circumstances. And I found hope in David's ability to finally relinquish his controlling nature and lie down with the dogs. To me, this symbolizes a man who is acknowledging the fact that he raped the student in an effort to control a situation, despite his self delusions of being under some sort of erotic spell. He is what he is, and I think he sees this. It's a novel of change, not comfortable, predictable change, but violent, discomfiting change of the sort that can become lasting. It does seem to be a novel that's spat into the face of the reader, it almost felt flung there. And I don't know if that is technique or a result of authorial intent or personality. Does it really matter as long as the result is a memorable, thought-provoking experience?